There are no forest on Earth / The Devils Tower is a giant petrified tree stump

User Name

Remember Me?

Password

Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider
registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.

Long story short in the past "forests" were made up of gigantic, kilometer high trees. What we have now are just basically small patches of shrubs.

Oh and the Devils Tower (below) in Wyoming is not really a 1,267 feet (386 m) high laccolithic butte composed of igneous rock as us sheeple have been lead to believe. It (and many other buttes and mesas) is a petrified stump of one of those ancient giant trees.

__________________(Formally JoeBentley)

"Ernest Hemingway once wrote that the world is a fine place and worth fighting for. I agree with the second part." - Detective Sommerset, Se7en

I'm struggling to understand the conspiracy theory, can you flesh it out a little more?

and BTW that is an impressive piece of rock.

The skinny is, that mesas & mountains are petrified trees. There was a huge cataclysm that deforested the earth, & all we are left with are a bunch of bushes.

It ties into flat earth by proving "THEY" know the truth about the cataclysm (people were around for it. It's happened in like the 2nd-3rd age of mankind. We're on the 5th) & trees of that size can only grow "up".

Complete bollocks. Everyone knows it used to hold one of the Lamps of the Valar.

Dave

__________________Me: So what you're saying is that, if the load carrying ability of the lower structure is reduced to the point where it can no longer support the load above it, it will collapse without a jolt, right?

Long story short in the past "forests" were made up of gigantic, kilometer high trees. What we have now are just basically small patches of shrubs.

Oh and the Devils Tower (below) in Wyoming is not really a 1,267 feet (386 m) high laccolithic butte composed of igneous rock as us sheeple have been lead to believe. It (and many other buttes and mesas) is a petrified stump of one of those ancient giant trees.

So it turns out that flat-earthers, the very people who pride themselves on not being gulled by supposed scientific dogma are in actual fact the most gullible people in the whole wide (oblate spheroid) world? Huh.

__________________Do not weep. Do not wax indignant. Understand. - Baruch Spinoza
You are not entitled to your opinion. You are entitled to your informed opinion. No one is entitled to be ignorant. - Harlan Ellison

So (rule of so), the stump of a kilometer high tree is 386m. That's going to be a REALLY funny-looking tree.

I wonder if the strength of any known wood could actually support such a structure?

Why would the square-cube law NOT be limiting to tree height? The limiting factor is generally assumed to be energy required to draw water up the trunk, which is linearly proportional to height. Water movement appears to be one of the big limiting factors in tree growth. It appears on earth that 120-130m is about the maximum height of a tree. It gets harder and harder to get water up to the top.

I think they'd have to evoke 'lesser gravity in the old earth scenario'.

__________________"At the Supreme Court level where we work, 90 percent of any decision is emotional. The rational part of us supplies the reasons for supporting our predilections."
Justice William O. Douglas

I wonder if the strength of any known wood could actually support such a structure?

Why would the square-cube law NOT be limiting to tree height? The limiting factor is generally assumed to be energy required to draw water up the trunk, which is linearly proportional to height. Water movement appears to be one of the big limiting factors in tree growth. It appears on earth that 120-130m is about the maximum height of a tree. It gets harder and harder to get water up to the top.

Yep. This "Stump" would already be many magnitudes taller than any tree could possibly grow. The particularly large trees we have now (Giant Sequoias, Coast Redwoods, Mountain Ash, etc) already get to 90-115m, so we're probably seeing trees right now at pretty much the practical real world limit.

__________________(Formally JoeBentley)

"Ernest Hemingway once wrote that the world is a fine place and worth fighting for. I agree with the second part." - Detective Sommerset, Se7en

Long story short in the past "forests" were made up of gigantic, kilometer high trees. What we have now are just basically small patches of shrubs.

Oh and the Devils Tower (below) in Wyoming is not really a 1,267 feet (386 m) high laccolithic butte composed of igneous rock as us sheeple have been lead to believe. It (and many other buttes and mesas) is a petrified stump of one of those ancient giant trees.

Re Devil's Tower: The damn thing does look like a giant tree stump, and 9/11 truthers have taught me that whatever something looks like, is what it is (e.g the collapse of Building 7 looks like a controlled demolition (if you don't look real close), so it was a controlled demolition). Since Devil's tower is a tree stump by that impeccable logic, I can marvel at not only how big the tree was, but at how big Paul Bunyan must have been to cut it down. Of course, I do have to wonder what the heck happened to the rest of the tree. It must have been a hell of a job to cut it up and haul it away.

I wonder if it made a sound when it fell, since no one was around to hear it.

I wonder where all the wood went. Using the posted height of 1,267 feet, and estimating the width to be similar, we can determine an estimate of the volume of the tower, as the volume of a cylinder, pi*r^2*h. I calculate it to be just over 1.5 billion cubic feet, which is about 44.7 million cubic meters.

Which indicates in figure 1 that total world production of hardwood lumber has varied between about 95 to 120 million cubic meters per year. So, this stump alone would be about one third to one half of our total world production, for one year. How much would the whole tree be?

__________________Obviously, that means cats are indeed evil and that ownership or display of a feline is an overt declaration of one's affiliation with dark forces. - Cl1mh4224rd

Re Devil's Tower: The damn thing does look like a giant tree stump, and 9/11 truthers have taught me that whatever something looks like, is what it is (e.g the collapse of Building 7 looks like a controlled demolition (if you don't look real close), so it was a controlled demolition). Since Devil's tower is a tree stump by that impeccable logic, I can marvel at not only how big the tree was, but at how big Paul Bunyan must have been to cut it down. Of course, I do have to wonder what the heck happened to the rest of the tree. It must have been a hell of a job to cut it up and haul it away.

Be fair! I'm no biologist, but in my informal observations, the parts that are cut off above the stump decompose more quickly than the stump.

I mean, you don't want to make the "Devil's Tower is a tree stump" crowd look like morons here. Apply the principle of charity and try to cast them in the least loony light.

I wonder where all the wood went. Using the posted height of 1,267 feet, and estimating the width to be similar, we can determine an estimate of the volume of the tower, as the volume of a cylinder, pi*r^2*h. I calculate it to be just over 1.5 billion cubic feet, which is about 44.7 million cubic meters.

Which indicates in figure 1 that total world production of hardwood lumber has varied between about 95 to 120 million cubic meters per year. So, this stump alone would be about one third to one half of our total world production, for one year. How much would the whole tree be?

How much wood would the whole tree be if the whole tree could be wood?

The Close Encounters viewing sounds kinda cool. I wonder if it's in the "box canyon"?

Yep. This "Stump" would already be many magnitudes taller than any tree could possibly grow. The particularly large trees shrubs we have now (Giant Sequoias, Coast Redwoods, Mountain Ash, etc) already get to 90-115m, so we're probably seeing trees shrubs right now at pretty much the practical real world limit.

And all of these years living right in the center of the largest Coast Redwoods alive on the planet, I must now tell strangers to these parts that no longer do I live in a beautiful forest of spectacular trees; I now live in a thicket of shrubs.

Goddammit! The world is just filling up with more and more idiots! And the computer is giving them access to the world! They're spreading their stupidity! At least they were contained before—now they're on the loose everywhere!

Yes the fruit cakes were once limited to 'letters to the editor' and those blue mimeograph sheets and now they can self publish, make youtube videos and of course bother people on social media and with websites/blogs.